Winemaker cleared of criminal damage

An Australian winemaker accused of emptying thousands of litres worth of wine from a rival’s tanks has had the charges thrown out of court, with the defece citing an “absolute lack” of evidence against him.

Trevor Jones, owner of Trevor Jones Fine Wines, was accused of destroying 25,000 litres of Chardonnay at the Kellermeister winery in Barossa Valley earlier this year by opening the taps of several tanks.

Charged with trespassing and criminal damage, the evidence against Jones was “unclear CCTV footage that apparently caught him in the act and the testimony of Kellermeister owner, Mark Pearce – whom Jones used to work for as a winemaker until the end of his employment at Kellermeister in 2010.

His defence moved to dismiss the charges by pointing out that the footage was not clear enough to identify Jones – as the man in the video is wearing a hat – and the time and date of the footage did not match those of his alleged actions.

Furthermore, the fingerprints found on the tank were not his and there were no traces of mud or wine on the clothes he was supposedly wearing at the time. They added there was “bad blood” between the pair that arose from the way Jones’ time at Kellermeister had come to an end.

According to local paper The Advertiser, Jones’ QC, MArk Griffin, said: “It’s alleged that Jones bears animosity toward Mr Pearce as a result of his employment as a winemaker at Kellermeister coming to an end in 2010.

“But what’s asserted as a motive against Jones stands as a motive why Mr Pearce might want to blame Jones as the person he says he can see in the CCTV footage.

“As a result, a person who’s plainly biased against Jones has fingered him in the vision — and that is not sufficient for a case to answer (at trial).”

The magistrate agreed, saying the prosecution was unable to “prove the provenance” of the footage.

Defence lawyers also cited Australian wine writer James Halliday, saying his initial reports on the story before the conclusion of the case amounted to contempt of court and defamation of their client but the magistrate made no ruling on this particular point.

Although the case has been dismissed from the magistrates court, prosecutors can still file new charges in the District Court.